Jesus is our God, bottom line.

Deuteronomy 6:16
16 Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him in Massah

reason of the verse is from old testament... the Lord your "God".

Genesis 2

7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.


And many more references of "LORD" God in through out the OT. And continuing on into the NT. Makes me sick how the world only views Jesus as "Son of God". When in fact he is God and only refrenced as "son of God" When God himself came in the form of a servant. No where you'll see Jesus reference his father as ours.. or his God as ours.. but always he himself as our God.


Deuteronomy 10:17

17 For the Lord your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:


YOUR God, not your son of God or anything.. but YOUR God.

I would not get so upset about it.

AS I understand it 'Lord' is a title, like 'King' or even 'Father'


so God is the LORD of all lords, King of all Kings, and 'Father who art in Heaven'


and can be referred to as OUR LORD GOD

there are many scriptures where Jesus sits IN THE FLESH telling others about his 'Father' being our 'Father'

OR

telling them their 'FATHER' is in heaven, (not sitting before them, where he is speaking)

OR

calling out to HIS GOD

John 20:17 Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"


Matthew 23:9 And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?



so, as I understand it, though we have our Lord Jesus Christ, we also have THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY

and our Lord Jesus Christ shared our LORD GOD with us


I understand the belief in trinity as well, but I do not and would not hold the interpretation of something so easily ambiguous in importance,,,when it is the message of HIS word, that is the point

John 10:30

30 I and my Father are one.



10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

So could he be saying in 9 that he is essentially our father? I mean Jesus was to return to Heaven at this point, so therefore anyone that would read/learn about us having a "father" in Heaven, he would essentially be there.

could be

or it could be that they are a unit , comprised of parts, like a husband and wife are 'one'


either way, since Jesus does also refer to God in third person,,,I would not consider it definitive enough to be upset about

very similar to husband and wife as far as I am aware of. The word(s) translated into this are referencing wills, desires, goals, ect. The way they "operate" are "one". They are one "God". In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was with God. That's why there is one God, yet it is said let "us" make man in "our" image.



But it's not "our LORD God" with us. It is plainly "God with us".


Matthew 1:23

23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

Genesis 1:1

Colossians 1
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
======

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
-----

Notice it states all things were made by him after referencing and explaining who the "Word" is/was. Later we truly see who the Word is.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
=====

It just truly astonishes me on how the church "whatever belief *system* they are, it's always preached Jesus merely being the son of God. Which is true AFTER he took on the form of a "servant". Sorry if some of this is repeated in the remarks persay... just truly amazes me growing up learning and being taught that belief. But Jesus is hardly ever specifically referenced as our God in the culture I've grew up with anyways and he is the God of Gods. And I've lived from Cali, to NM, to KY, which all preach/teach Jesus merely being just the son of God.

And for me , I cannot fathom what 'just' the son of God even means,,,

different interpretation of not the clearest message of the Bible,


ADAM was also created by God,, but did not come THROUGH a human female, and not ever called the son of God or 'just' the son of God or even Lord


titles,, and semantics,, the Lord called God , HIS God and OUR God,,which makes the perception that he was not GOD reasonable and understandable and hard to disprove

I think it would be amazing for us to translate the original scriptures the bible is derived from again. Now that we have much more knowledge along such culture then, eg., vocabulary. Since most the english translations is a translation of a translation of a translation from a language that is no longer spoken in the form it's spoken/written to this day in age. And base the "general" belief system then off the new bible translation that would follow.

it would be interesting,,,

ADAM was created by LORD God eg., Jesus prior to that name being given to him. But none the less, I believe the difference in why ADAM was not referenced as the "son of God" was because ADAM wasn't "born" or "conceived". He was specifically created out of the dust, but none the less was created and formed that way rather then being born. That and "ADAM" means mankind. It's not a singular person. That is why through Genesis there is reference of Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel. So who did Cain and Able "marry/enspouse"? Some people of "ADAM/EVE" must have moved to another location.. believe it was Cannite or something of such is where they found their spouse(s) if I'm not mistaken.



Oh totally hard to disprove. Especially on the level that people believe what they believe about the scriptures or "Christianity" from being preached to, rather then investigating it themselves.. more or less. Of course there are some that have lol, but for the general pop that would be the case. And again they study/investigate a translation of a translation ect.

That's semi the reason I started this thread.... not to form an entire religion of course rofl... but to show and open peoples mind and eyes to what the scriptures actually say/teach on such levels especially in comparison to the general preaching that's gone on for thousands of years. And to get further discussion/investigation and possibly knowledge on the subject, again beyond what is/has been preached and just taken for face value.

And due to translations, and word meaning "context" changing, it makes it sort of hard to understand things such as.

Philippians 2:6

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God


John 5:18

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
=============

Also notice in Philippians "being the form of God". Thus before he came in the form of a "servant". But specifically states there he was in the form of "God" prior to that. And returned to his glory when he returned to Heaven.

People have placed Jesus at the level of brother.


Isaiah 64:8

8 But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

,,,does not say did not consider BEING GOD,,it says equality with God

and later on in Philipians


Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,


not that HE exalted himself


The belief is logical, that there is only one GOD and one begotten SON of God,, who referred to GOD as his own Father and our Father, making us semantically 'siblings',, although he is the sibling with the highest place of all siblings



but again,, its semantical, and not of utter importance so long as his importance and sacrifice are understood

Philippians 2:6

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God

Which translation are you using? "Who being in the form of God" He didn't "consider" being God because he was/is God. It's not something he just considered for himself. The consideration part was in terms to being equal to "God". And again due to translations, I wished I knew the original terms because not the same original term is same with each mention of the word "God".

And yes God did exalt him shortly after giving him a name higher then any other. But that was AFTER he took on the form of a servant and dwelt among us in the flesh. Remember, when Jesus came, he left his "glory" behind when he was in the form of a servant.

Jesus was in the beginning with God and was God eg., the Word was with God in the beginning and was God. The only time the references of father/son come into play is after he leaves his glory behind and comes in the form of a servant. While he was in that form he was the son of God. But prior to that and later references of him do not say it as so. And wouldn't make us semantically "siblings" with him neither. For he is the ONLY begotten son of God. We are children of Jesus our father, whom created us.

its purely a difference in perception

JEsus said he was going to HIS father and OUR Father

which indicates two existing at one time, a father AND a son


semantically, who has the same father? siblings...


again though, it is far from the point of the gospel or the message of Jesus,, he never stood anywhere and declared he WAS GOD, so I do not believe his message meant for anyone to focus on that,,,

Luke 4:12

12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.




He never declared he was God you say? The Lord YOUR God.

I'm sorry if I don't see the verse posted now, but I'm unaware of Jesus referencing anyone other then himself as our father. May you give that verse please?